Section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017—Goods in Transit -—The petitioner challenged a detention order dated 21.09.2022, whereby the goods were detained on the ground that the goods were without E-Way bill. The counsel for the petitioner stated that in the event Part - B of the E-Way Bill was not being carried, no penalty is imposable. The detaining authority does not have the jurisdiction to value the goods as has been done. The order imposing the penalty on valuation is without jurisdiction. The court observed that value of the supply of goods is clear from the transaction value as indicated in the tax invoice and there being nothing on record to demonstrate that the said tax invoice was not acceptable Thus, the orders impugned insofar as it imposes the burden on the petitioner to get the goods released in terms of Section 129(1)(b) of the Act is bad in law.

Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court set aside the impugned orders dated 26.09.2022 and 19.10.2022. Further, directed the respondents to release the goods and vehicle to the petitioners, if the petitioners offer to pay 200% of the tax payable on the goods, valuing the same on the basis of the valuation, as shown in the invoice. As soon as the petitioner tenders the amounts as is required under Section 129(1)(a) of the Act, the goods shall be released to the petitioner.